Terrorists also seem to have a total disregard for their actions and how it affects civilians. I think the word I am looking for is morally disengaged?
I do not think that is the case for most US military personnel in my opinion. I honestly believe their main self fulfilling objective in joining is the group dynamic of protecting and serving their country.
It seems to me as though you've embraced the brand, Mango, and not the definition our government provided us. Morally disengaged is the criteria? Well...
Sometimes, the actions and reactions of the Sons of Liberty to the Stamp Act took a violent turn as recorded in a local New York City merchant's diary in April, 1765. Violence broke out with the arrival of a shipment of stamped paper to the Royal Governor's residence. Cadwallder Colden, the acting Royal Governor of the New York colony and scholarly correspondent of Benjamin Franklin and Dr. Samuel Johnson, was extremely frightened of the patriotic group and so locked himself up securely inside Fort George immediately after he received the stamped paper from British officials. A few hours after receiving the official papers, a raucous mob captured the governor's gilded and spectacular coach and reduced it to a pile of ashes. From here the mob (consisting largely of extremist elements of the New York Sons of Liberty) raced uptown to the home of Fort George's commander, smashing numerous windows and breaking into the wine cellar to sustain their "patriotism" before descending on the rest of the house in a convulsion of vandalism. Tarring and feathering Loyalists ? those individuals who sympathized and were supportive of the British Crown, royal tax collectors, and other officials ? was a common practice carried out by the more radical elements of the organizations. (from EarlyAmerica.com)
As the saying goes, one man's terrorist is another man's patriot.
Hearing some of the comments above reminds me of sitting in a History of the Middle East class when I was about 20 and voicing some of the same sentiments about freedom and democracy being contagious. We had a group of Lebanese army officers who were training at Fort Benning's School of the Americas who came to speak to the class, and afterwards asked if they could attend each session. Those men changed my thinking about the Middle East in so many ways. The whole "given the choice, everyone will choose capitalism, democracy, and freedom (as we define it)" argument is so ethnocentric and fails to factor in the culture of the people of the Middle East. I do believe that all human beings want the same thing on the most basic level, however I'm not sure I think that they will all see that emulating the culture of the West is the only path to happiness. Have we, as free, capitalist, little 'd' democrats created a perfect society? Yes, some aspects of their culture are medieval, but it's their culture. Our culture had it's own medieval period and was able to evolve organically.
I hope that this post will not be interpreted as pro-terrorist. The point I was trying to make was that 1) our government's definition of terrorism illegalizes the very sort of actions that created it, and 2) perhaps we should acknowledge that when we say "terrorist" we are using a code word for Islamic fundamentalist jihadists of the late 20th/early 21st century and the other semi-successful dissidents of the world they inspired.